LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate Mr F’s complaint about Penalty Charge Notices issued by Transport for London (TfL) for moving traffic offences. It would have been reasonable for Mr F to appeal against the notices to London Tribunals, and there is not enough evidence of fault in the way TfL has issued the PCNs or rejected Mr F’s representations on them to warrant our involvement.

Summary: We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council handled a penalty charge notice issued in October 2020. We cannot lawfully investigate because Mr X has used his legal remedies to the Traffic Enforcement Centre and London Tribunals adjudicator.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Penalty Charge Notices. This is because it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to appeal the PCNs to the London Tribunals.

Summary: We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council issuing a penalty charge notice when he was parked near his garage. We cannot lawfully investigate because Mr X used his right of appeal to the London Tribunals adjudicator.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a penalty charge notice as it is reasonable to expect Mrs X to have appealed against it to London Tribunals.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice. This is because it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to appeal to the London Tribunals, there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating and it is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint handling when we are not investigating the substantive matter.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s issuing of a Penalty Charge Notice to Ms X for a parking violation. This is because Ms X has appealed to London Tribunals and so the complaint falls outside our jurisdiction.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Penalty Charge Notices. This is because it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to appeal to the London Tribunals.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the authority recovering a traffic penalty for a vehicle which Mrs X had sold. The penalty was submitted to the adjudicator at the London Tribunals, and this is the proper authority to consider traffic penalty appeals.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice. This is because it is reasonable to expect Mrs Y to appeal to the London Tribunals.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about a penalty charge notice. Mr X appealed against it to London Tribunals and so the matter is now not within our legal remit.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a penalty charge notice. Mr X appealed against it to London Tribunals and so the matter is no longer within our remit.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about penalty charge notices as Ms X appealed against them to London Tribunals. Ms X’s complaint about a refund for a parking permit is made late to us and there are not good reasons to investigate now.

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about a penalty charge notice for a moving traffic contravention. The complainant has appealed against the penalty charge notice to London Tribunals.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice. This is because it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to appeal to the London Tribunals.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice. This is because it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to appeal to the London Tribunals.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Penalty Charge Notices. This is because it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to appeal to the London Tribunals.

Summary: We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council’s parking bay suspension signage was not compliant with the relevant regulations. This is because the injustice caused to Mr X lies in a penalty charge notice against which he has appealed. We will not investigate Mr X’s more general complaint about the Council’s signage as the issue is more appropriate for consideration by London Tribunals on a case by case basis as part of an appeal.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice. This is because it is reasonable to expect Miss Y to appeal to the London Tribunals.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice. This is because it is reasonable to expect Mrs Y to appeal to the London Tribunals.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a penalty charge notice issued by the Council. This is because it would have been reasonable for him to appeal to London Tribunals. If Mr X believes the Council has failed to follow the appeals process it would be reasonable for him to apply to the Traffic Enforcement Centre at Northampton County Court to make a late witness statement.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice. This is because it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to appeal to the London Tribunals.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice. This is because it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to appeal to the London Tribunals about the PCN.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint the Council issued a penalty charge notice for a driving contravention. The Council has reduced the fine and investigation is not likely to achieve more. We cannot investigate the issuing of the penalty charge notice because Ms X appealed to the London Tribunals adjudicator.